Category Archives: Uncategorized

Post Ferguson Fear of the Grand Jury: Fox 2 Questions Trial Attorney Michelle Funkenbusch On Move to Grand Jury of Furrer’s Felony Case

Is a Grand Jury still Grand???

Reporter Andy Banker  from Fox 2 stopped by the office this afternoon to talk about the move of Mayor Mark Furrer’s case to a grand jury at the last minute from a preliminary hearing.  As you know, the proceedings are secret and we cannot watch or be part of the process as the law firm for the victim. We represent cyclist Randy Murdick who alleges the Mayor of Sunset Hills intentionally ran him off the road. Reporter Banker was wondering if we have concerns over the last minute move to a grand jury.

While I do not have blind faith in the legal process, I do, in fact, have faith in our justice system that an indictment will follow.  I have personally seen in my criminal defense work, the St. Louis County Prosecutor’s Office fight zealously to protect our streets from people they believe endanger us on the road.  We will find out in the next few days the fate in the criminal court of the Mayor of Sunset Hills. Let us hope that the people that lost faith in the justice system over “Ferguson” will see that the Grand Jury is still grand.

Michelle M. Funkenbusch

314-338-3500

Sunset Hills Mayor’s Felony Case Set For Grand Jury Wednesday; Board of Aldermen set to Vote on Impeachment Ordinance Tuesday

Grand Jury to be used to determine probable cause in case of assault of a cyclist by local Mayor Mark Furrer. The victim is represented by cyclist and St. Louis Trial lawyer Michelle Funkenbusch.

The felony assault and property damage case against Sunset Hills Mayor Mark Furrer has been switched from the preliminary hearing docket to the St. Louis County Grand Jury. The case stems from allegations Mark Furrer intentionally hit cyclist Randy Murdick with his car after yelling “get off my $#^&ing road” several times. As many of you know, our law firm represents the cyclist in the personal injury case and we make it our regular practice to advocate for cycling safety and for sharing the roads. We have been asked many questions about the pending felony case and impeachment process.  The Grand Jury hearing is scheduled this Wednesday December 10, 2014. The St. Louis Grand Jury process has been in the news a great deal lately with the “no true bill” finding regarding Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown.

On October 1, 2014, a Complaint was filed in St. Louis County, Missouri against Sunset Hills Mayor Mark Furrer for Second Degree Assault and First degree property damage, C and D felonies, following his attempt to run Randy Murdick off the road. Randy was on his bicycle while the Mayor was driving his red Mercedes convertible. According to the Prosecutor’s office, the investigating officer will be the only one to testify. The victim has not been asked to testify. The proceeding, like all Grand Jury proceedings, is closed to the public. We will likely find out the results Thursday.

Three independent witnesses support Randy Murdick’s version of the events. The Mayor has claimed in the media that Randy tried to hang onto his convertible after running a stop sign. Randy has vehemently denied the Mayor’s allegations and those allegations are not supported by any witnesses.

SUNSET HILLS BOARD OF ALDERMAN OPEN MEETING TUESDAY DECEMBER 9th, 2014 TO VOTE ON IMPEACHMENT ORDINANCE

Tuesday December 9th, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Sunset Hills Community Center will be the monthly Sunset Hills Board of Alderman meeting wherein they will be voting on the impeachment procedures introduced at the last meeting.  At the beginning of the meeting, you have to make a request to speak if you wish to do so. You will have three minutes. We encourage all Sunset Hills residents and cyclists in our area to attend and voice your opinion at the meeting.   We have learned that the Mayor may attempt to limit the opportunity to speak to only Sunset Hills residents and businesses.  We were given a copy of a letter today wherein he is seeking Board of Alderman support to shut down non-residents from voicing their opinions. As a St. Louis Trial Law Firm, we believe that any attempt to limit non-residents from speaking is unconstitutional and we hope that you show up and make your voice heard if you use the roads in Sunset Hills or believe in supporting safety for all the vulnerable road users.

Some alderman, residents, and non-resident cyclists have been very vocal about the need to impeach the Mayor for his actions in this case and for other unrelated reasons. Cyclists and supporters of the Mayor both attended the last meeting heating up the room during the open forum. Some believe he should not be impeached unless he is found guilty of a crime first, while others believe the unethical actions he admitted to in the media, along with his actions since the alleged crime occurred, is enough to impeach. Missouri state law does not require a finding of guilt to impeach a Mayor in a city the size of Sunset Hills; however there are currently no ordinances in effect regarding impeachment procedure in Sunset Hills.  The findings of the Grand Jury and likely the police report will be available before the vote to impeach the Mayor, which could come as early as January or February 2015.

WHY A GRAND JURY IN THE CRIMINAL CASE?

Some people may be confused as to why a Grand Jury is necessary as a “Complaint” was filed on October 1, 2014. That is true, however, there must still be a finding of probable cause to proceed to trial in Missouri. Here, the criminal justice process starts by the filing of a document called a “Complaint” wherein the prosecutor states that they believe probable cause exists that the defendant committed certain crimes. This filing is followed by either a preliminary hearing OR a Grand Jury proceeding resulting in an indictment if a “true bill” is issued. The prosecutor’s office in the Mayor’s case decided to send it to the grand jury either before or after it was scheduled for preliminary hearing at the last docket. This is within their right to switch to a Grand Jury.

In Missouri, a defendant who is subject to indictment by Grand Jury is denied the right to present evidence to explain or contradict the charge, although as we saw in the Wilson case, a prosecutor may choose to present contradictory or exculpatory evidence. The Mayor has no constitutional or other right to appear before the Grand Jury and will only be there if the prosecutor calls him as a witness. The handling of the Darren Wilson Grand Jury evidence and the fact he testified was unusual. It is unlikely the Mayor would be called as a witness, although not impossible. There are no defense attorneys involved in a Grandy Jury hearing. The fact that this case went to a Grand Jury is significant because if it went to a preliminary hearing the Mayor would have had the right to appear and cross-examine witnesses through counsel, unlike the grand jury indictment process. Plus, the public and media would be able to see the testimony in a preliminary hearing.

Even if a true bill is issued, the indictment is merely an accusation against the Mayor. The true bill is not “evidence” that the Mayor committed the crimes charged. He still has a right to a full criminal trial. However, as far as impeachment goes, if probable cause is found the “true bill”, if issued, could be relied upon by the Board of Alderman, along with the police report, for purposes of impeachment.  Also, if a “true bill” is issued, an arraignment would then be scheduled, which is the formal presentation of charges against the Mayor in open court. During an arraignment, the charges would be read to Mark Furrer by a judge in the St. Louis County Circuit Court, and then Furrer would be asked to plead guilty or not guilty to the charges. They can also ask to waive the reading and plead guilty or not guilty in paperwork. During this time is also when he may be offered a deal to avoid trial on the charges.

If you have any questions about a criminal or personal injury case arising our of crimes against cyclists, please do not hesitate to contact our firm. We would be honored to advocate on your behalf.

Michelle M. Funkenbusch

St. Louis Trial Lawyer and Bike Advocate

314-338-3500

 

Congress did something SMART… no really: St. Louis Trial Lawyer Breaks Down The SMART Act of 2013.

How to Handle Medicare Liens on Personal Injury Cases

While we were all worrying about falling off the fiscal cliff, Congress and the President did something SMART… literally.   The SMART Act was signed by President Obama on January 10, 2013. It makes numerous complicated administrative changes to Medicare that effect personal injury cases where the employee or plaintiff is on Medicare and has had treatment paid by Medicare.  While most of this may be over the average person’s head, if you stop reading now, just know that something “good” happened to reduce bureaucracy and to speed up settlements that need the federal government’s approval.

For example, when a senior citizen covered by Medicare is treated after an accident or an injury, it’s generally paid for by Medicare. Those medical expenses must then be reimbursed through insurance or a legal settlement. But, the process by which that was to happen has not been running smoothly. The Strengthening Medicare and Repaying Taxpayers, or SMART, Act aims to remedy that.

Many claims involving Medicare beneficiaries could not settle because the parties  could not determine their respective obligations to reimburse the federal government in the Medicare Trust Fund.  The result was a lose-lose-lose for the beneficiary, the defendant, and the Medicare Trust Fund – all because under the former law, Medicare had no pathway to provide the amount due the Trust Fund for “conditional payments” – those payments previously made by Medicare for the injury that will be covered by the settlement.

The SMART Act  fixes this problem by creating a process for Medicare to advise parties in the process of settling, before settlement, of how much is owed, so that the parties can appropriately allocate and resolve their Medicare obligations during settlement. By requiring Medicare to provide the amount due within 65 days of a request, the settling parties will know how much money has to be set aside for Medicare, and factor that amount into their final settlement.

There were numerous other changes. I have summarized some of them for you below.  These amendments will require changes to settlement procedure, lien resolution and reporting, and release language.  If you are on Medicare and have a personal injury case, make sure you have a lawyer that knows and understands the SMART ACT.

SUMMARY OF SOME OF THE CHANGES

Access to Information About How Much Medicare Paid

Old Law:   Did not require Medicare to give immediate access to the conditional payments that were made on behalf of a claimant.

New Law:  Up-to-date Conditional Payment Information Available Online

Claimants and responsible reporting entities (RREs, as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b)(8)) will now have access to up-to-date information on the claims for which conditional payments have been made by CMS. Again,  conditional payments are those payments previously made by Medicare for the injury that will be covered by the settlement. The SMART Act requires CMS to make claims information—including payment amounts and information regarding claims related to a potential settlement, judgment, or other payment—available to claimants or their authorized representatives and RREs (that have obtained the claimant’s consent) through a secure website. This information must be updated no later than fifteen (15) days after the date that payment is made.

Additionally, claimants or RREs now may provide notice to CMS that a settlement, judgment, award, or other payment is reasonably expected and the date of the expected payment up to 120 days before the reasonably expected date of the payment.

CMS already has a web-based portal for claims information, the Medicare Secondary payer Recovery Portal [https://www.cob.cms.hhs.gov/MSPRP/], which appears to satisfy the requirements of the SMART Act. Final regulations must be promulgated by  October 10, 2013, nine (9) months after date of enactment, the effective date of this provision.

Pre-Settlement Lien Demands

Old Law:  Medicare could not provide a final lien demand until after settlement.  The inability to finalize Medicare’s reimbursement interest prior to settlement complicated settlement and lien resolution.

New Law: Establishing Conditional Payment Exposure Prior to Settlement

The SMART Act provides a mechanism by which a claimant or RRE (responsible reporting entities as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b)(8)) determines liability for conditional payments prior to a settlement, judgment, award, or other payment for conditional payments. To do so:

  • the claimant or RRE (with the claimant’s consent) must obtain a statement of reimbursement amount from the website during the “protected period”—defined as the time, if any, after the expiration of the federal government’s response period following notice of a settlement, judgment, award, or other payment
    • the federal government’s response period is 65 days following notice
    • it may be extended by an additional 30 days if additional time is required to address claims for which payment has been made
    • it does not include any days where there was a failure in the claims payment and posting system due to exceptional circumstances as defined by regulation
  • the related settlement, judgment, award, or other payment must be made during that period, and
  • the last statement of reimbursement downloaded during that period and within three (3) business days of the date of the settlement, judgment, award, or other payment shall constitute the final conditional amount subject to recovery by the federal government related to that settlement, judgment, award, or other payment.

Final regulations must be promulgated by October 10, 2013, nine (9) months after date of enactment, the effective date of this provision.

Minimum Values Established

Old Law: The Medicare Lien reimbursement process currently applies even to settlements of minimal value.

New Law:  The SMART Act establishes a threshold below which the lien reimbursement and Section 111 reporting obligations do not apply.  The threshold will be established each year beginning in 2014.  The minimum threshold exception does not apply to settlements concerning alleged ingestion, implantation or exposure (including asbestos).

UPDATED July 31, 2013:

To further explain the minimum values… the SMART Act requires HHS to set a “single monetary compliance threshold” for certain claims, starting on November 15, 2014.  The purpose underlying that amendment is to avoid expending resources in seeking to recover conditional payments the value of which is less than the expense necessary to recover them. This is sort of a common sense provision as you will.  The “monetary compliance threshold” that the Act contemplates would be a dollar figure that defines the minimum value of a conditional payment for which Medicare could pursue reimbursement without wasting more resources in seeking to recover the payment than the claim itself is worth.  The SMART Act requires the Secretary of HHS to set and adjust that minimum threshold figure no later than November 15 each year, starting in 2014.  Attorneys should calander this date to learn the threshold for that year.

The monetary compliance threshold does not apply to all conditional payments.  More specifically, the monetary compliance threshold applies only to (1) liability TPOC reporting (total payment obligation to the claimant); and (2) conditional payments pertaining to “alleged physical trauma-based incidents,” but not incidents based on alleged ingestion, implantation, or exposure.

§111 Penalty Modification

Old Law: Companies that reported settlements involving Medicare beneficiaries to CMS either late or erroneously were subject to automatic fines of $1,000 per-day, per-claim.

New Law: Such penalties are now discretionary, not automatic.  HHS is directed to create “safe harbors” for companies that report in good faith, despite being late or in error. §203, SMART Act.

No SSN or HICN

Old Law: Claims professionals and settlement parties use claimants’ Social Security numbers (SSNs) or Health Insurance Claim Numbers (“Medicare numbers”) to access claimant health records. This situation has obvious and troubling privacy implications.

New Law: Within 18 months, the Secretary of HHS is to change §111 of Mandatory Insurance Reporting to make use of SSNs and Medicare numbers optional rather than required. Medicare beneficiaries are understandably reluctant to provide this information – given the high incidence of identity theft.  The SMART Act protects beneficiaries’ sensitive personal information while also reducing professionals’ liability exposure in the event of subsequent beneficiary identity theft. §204, SMART Act.

UPDATE:  July 31, 2013

I received a call from a lawyer today asking if SSN’s are still required as his client does not want to give out his SSN. As of this date, SSN’s are still required.   The Act provides that CMS must implement this requirement within 18 months of the SMART Act’s enactment, or by the middle of 2014.  That deadline is not a firm one, however.  The Act permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (the agency in which CMS operates) to request an extension of that 18-month deadline by “one or more periods up to one year each” if the Secretary believes that eliminating the use of social security numbers and health insurance claim numbers by the operative deadline “threatens patient privacy or the integrity of the secondary payer program[.]”  I will keep monitoring for changes but I suggest if you are an attorney and uncertain that you contact the HHS Department.

Three-Year Statute of Limitations

Old Law:   The MSP statute permits the government to pursue settling defendants for unsatisfied Medicare Liens in certain circumstances, even after the defendant has paid settlement funds to the plaintiff. Unclear law and inconsistent court rulings left settlement parties without a clear answer on the scope of the statute of limitations for the government to bring an action seeking conditional payment.

New Law: The SMART Act codifies a 2010 U.S. District Court decision – U.S. v. Stricker – which held that the government must file a complaint within three years of receiving notice that a judgment or settlement has been reached. §205, SMART Act.

Full Text of H.R. 1845: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1845rds/pdf/BILLS-112hr1845rds.pdf

 

A Lawyer’s Timeline Under SMART for Finding Out How Much to Pay Back Medicare

For those lawyer fans of this blog, starting in October 2013, you should follow these rules to obtain a Final Conditional Amount.

  1. T-120 days to settlement – Send an Expected Settlement Notice to the MSPRC;
  2. T-115 days to settlement – Check to see if the MSPRC received the Expected Settlement Notice.  Everyone knows the MSPRC response, “we don’t have that in the file” or “I don’t see that here.”  If you don’t check you might waste the entire process.
  3. T-55 days to settlement – You should receive notice that the Final Conditional Amount is available for download on the MSPRC website, or more likely, the Medicare Secondary Payer Recovery Portal (MSPRP).  If you have not, contact the MSPRC to check the status.  Keep in mind the rule states they have 65 days from receipt of your notice – so we will have to keep track of how they define the word receipt.  If your case qualifies for “exceptional circumstances” the MSPRC will tell you it needs another 30 days to process the Final Conditional Amount.
  4. T-25 days to settlement – You should receive notice that your exceptional circumstances request is completed and the Final Conditional Amount is available for download.
  5. T-3 days to settlement – You must download the Final Conditional Amount from the designated website.  If you do so at 4 days to settlement it is apparently invalid and does not constitute a Final amount.  If you do so more than 3 days after settlement (we believe after is still okay – the rule uses the word “within”) it is also invalid.

-Published January 31, 2013.  Authored by Michelle M. Funkenbusch, St. Louis Trial lawyer

If you know someone in need of a personal injury lawyer, please contact St. Louis Personal Injury Lawyer Michelle Funkenbusch at 314-338-3500 .

 

 © 2013 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.

 

Learn Food Warranty Law Before You take Another Bite: Missouri Personal Injury Lawyer Gives You Some Legal Thoughts to Chew on.

We ALLL have food on the brain the day before Thanksgiving. So Missouri personal injury lawyer, Michelle Funkenbusch sums up Food Hazard/Choking Law for You:

 

Missouri Personal Injury Lawyer on Food/Choking Hazard Law
Missouri Personal Injury Lawyer on Food/Choking Hazard Law

According to Missouri personal injury lawyer, Michelle M. Funkenbusch,  if you are injured  at a restaurant choking on food hazards (like bones/plastic/toothpicks), Missouri courts follow warranty law to determine liability.  The same is true if you purchase a turkey from your local grocery store, cookies from your local scout troop, or candy from a vending machine, or even a beer from your local pub.  Specifically, Missouri follows the common law principle that there is an implied warranty as between the retail dealer and the consuming purchaser in the sale of food, including a warranty of freedom from foreign substances which may be injurious to the purchaser. Degouveia v. H.D. Lee Mercantile Co., 231 Mo.App. 447, 100 S.W.2d 336, 339 (1936).  A claim for common law implied warranty of fitness for consumption requires that a Plaintiff show:  (1) the defendant sold a food substance meant for human(or animal) consumption;  (2) the plaintiff (or your animal) ate or drank the food/drink; (3) when the defendant sold the food/drink it was not fit for human(or animal) consumption; and (4) the Plaintiff was damaged as a direct result.  See Missouri Approved Instructions (MAI 25.02).

[RANDOM LEGAL FACT OF THE DAY: The MAI is the book of jury instructions relied on by courts to instruct the jury what must be proved in a particular case. The Missouri Supreme Court committee on jury instructions creates this book and it must be reviewed and used in every civil case that goes to trial.]

Grandma’s Food Almost Killed Me!!

What if you are at your Grandma’s house for Thanksgiving and you choke on a foreign substance that you could/would not have inspected in the food?  Assuming it was not added to the food by your grandmother (which of course will be a defense of the seller and manufacturer), you may have a case for a personal injury lawyer to review.  It doesn’t matter that you didn’t buy the food at a restaurant or store.  If the injured party in a choking case was not the purchaser of goods, but is a natural person who is a member of the family or household of the buyer, or was a guest in the buyer’s home, and it was reasonable to expect that such person would consume  the food/drink, then the seller or manufacturer can be liable under the Uniform Commercial Code. In other words, even though you lack “privity of contract” you may be able to recover and should seek the counsel of a St. Louis personal injury lawyer.    And yes, you could sue Grandma for negligent cooking… but that’s just not nice!

Missouri Personal Injury Case Against the Manufacturer??

If you have sustained personal injury  in Missouri as a result of the consumption of a foreign body or substance in a food or beverage sold, you may also, under proper circumstances, maintain an action to recover damages for such injury against the manufacturer of the product, on the ground of breach of an express or implied warranty.  In the absence of an express warranty (something actually written on the product or packaging), the law implies that the manufacturer or packer of foods intended for human consumption warrants that his products are fit for human consumption, and that he has used in the selection and preparation of such products the degree of care ordinarily exercised by persons skilled in the business of preparing and packing food for distribution or sale to the general public.

A  manufacturer, in the proper factual situation, is held as an “absolute insurer against knowable dangers”, and thus has an incentive to keep abreast of scientific knowledge to keep knowable dangers out of their products.  But, in some cases (like in the case of cigarettes), what is knowable can be difficult to prove without a great deal of expense and highly trained personal injury lawyers.  Ross v. Phillip Morris, 328 F.2d 3 (United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit 1964).

Other Theories a St. Louis Personal Injury Lawyer May File Suit for in A Food Hazard Case

You may also have the right to sue under other theories of personal injury. For example, you may have a claim under the Uniform Commercial Code for breach of an implied warranty for fitness for a particular purpose or breach of implied warranty of merchantability (fitness for an ordinary purpose) in general.  You may also have a claim for strict liability for a product defect or for failure to warn.   These are complicated claims and require the expertise of an experienced St. Louis personal injury lawyer.

Choking on Bones in the Turkey vs. Glass in the Turkey… why is one a good case and one a bad case?

To have a good case of liability, you usually have to have been injured by something foreign to the food you were eating, but not always.  Liability for injuries caused by a substance in food will often depend on whether the substance in question is considered to be “foreign.”  Under the so-called foreign-natural test that many other states rely on, there is no liability for injury caused by a substance that are considered “natural” to the food sold.  If the object is one that is naturally associated with the type of food in which it is found, it is not considered to be foreign, since the occasional presence of such objects is something to be anticipated by the consumer. Thus, for example, a hardened, crystallized grain of corn has been held not to be foreign to a package of corn flakes, and a bone has been held not to be foreign to a canned food product containing meat of the kind from which the bone came. However, some courts have held that objects which are natural to the type of food involved but which generally are not found in the style of the food as prepared may be deemed to be the equivalent of a foreign substance. Thus, in an action against a packer of canned chicken for injuries sustained from a chicken bone in chicken chow mein served at the plaintiff’s school and made from the defendant’s product, the chicken bone was held to be “something that should not be” in defendant’s product, which defendant had advertised as “boned chicken.” It has also been held in other states that breach of an implied warranty of fitness is shown by proof of a piece of oyster shell in a can of oysters sold by a defendant retailer, even if it appears that shells cannot be entirely eliminated in the canning of oysters.

Several states have rejected the “foreign-natural” test in favor of what is known as the “reasonable expectation” test. This test is based on what is reasonably expected by the consumer in the food as served, not what might be natural to the ingredients of that food prior to its preparation.

The “foreign-natural” test apparently continues to be the rule in most jurisdictions.  In states where the “foreign-natural” test is applied, even if an injured plaintiff can establish an otherwise legally sufficient claim of negligence, breach of implied warranty, or strict tort liability, a food processor may be free from liability as a matter of law if the deleterious object or substance in the food is natural to the ingredients of the product.  However, in states where the “reasonable expectation” test is the rule, liability might be incurred on any appropriate theory even for a “natural” defect if it is one not reasonably anticipated by the consumer. There appears to be a recent trend among several states toward acceptance of  the “reasonable expectation” test.

Missouri has yet to directly adopt either test mentioned above and leaves the fitness for consumption a question for the jury.  This grey area of the law is another reason why you should consult with an experienced Missouri personal injury lawyer.  

Michelle M. Funkenbusch has handled cases involving plastic in pudding, foreign substances on buffets, rat parts in frozen spinach, lead poisoning, and more. Contact her if you would like to discuss your potential case for free at 314-338-3500.

 © 2012 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.

CLICKABLE MISSOURI VOTER GUIDE: BE PREPARED FOR ELECTION TUESDAY NOVEMBER 6, 2012

VOTE NEXT TUESDAY, November 6th. 

Voter Guide for Missouri General Election Provided by the Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch

Finding your polling place and sample ballot:

 Absentee Voting:

  • If you will be absent from your voting district on election day, or meet one of the other qualifications for absentee voting, you can request a ballot and return it by mail or fax, or vote in an early/absentee voting location–but you’ll need to plan ahead.  Details and information about absentee voting are here.

Information about candidates:

How to find your candidate’s names, your US Rep, State Rep, and State Senate District numbers:

BEWARE that many/most district numbers have changed this year in Missouri, thanks to the new census data and re-districting. Your state representative district number is almost certainly changed, and many state senate districts and US representative districts have changes boundaries, too–sometimes by a little and sometimes by a lot. Here is how to find your updated info:

November 2012 Ballot Issues:

MISSOURI CONSTITUTIONAL Amendment 3

 Judges
OFFICIAL BALLOT LANGUAGE
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to change the current nonpartisan selection of supreme court and court of appeals judges to a process that gives the governor increased authority to:
  • appoint a majority of the commission that selects these court nominees; and
  • appoint all lawyers to the commission by removing the requirement that the governor’s appointees be nonlawyers?
There are NO estimated costs or savings expected if this proposal is approved by voters.
FAIR BALLOT LANGUAGE
“yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to change the current nonpartisan selection of supreme court and court of appeals judges to a process that gives the governor increased authority to appoint a majority of the commission that selects these court nominees. This measure also allows the governor to appoint all lawyers to the commission by removing the requirement that the governor’s appointees be nonlawyers.
“no” vote will not change the current constitutional provisions for the nonpartisan selection of supreme court and court of appeals judges.

Proposition A

Law enforcement
Shall Missouri law be amended to:
  • allow any city not within a county (the City of St. Louis) the option of transferring certain obligations and control of the city’s police force from the board of police commissioners currently appointed by the governor to the city and establishing a municipal police force;
  • establish certain procedures and requirements for governing such a municipal police force including residency, rank, salary, benefits, insurance, and pension; and
  • prohibit retaliation against any employee of such municipal police force who reports conduct believed to be illegal to a superior, government agency, or the press?
State governmental entities estimated savings will eventually be up to $500,000 annually. Local governmental entities estimated annual potential savings of $3.5 million; however, consolidation decisions with an unknown outcome may result in the savings being more or less than estimated.
“yes” vote will amend Missouri law to allow any city not within a county (the City of St. Louis) the option of establishing a municipal police force by transferring certain obligations and control of the city’s police force from the board of police commissioners currently appointed by the governor to the city. This amendment also establishes certain procedures and requirements for governing such a municipal police force including residency, rank, salary, benefits, insurance, and pension.  The amendment further prohibits retaliation against any employee of such municipal police force who reports conduct believed to be illegal to a superior, government agency, or the press.A “no” vote will not change the current Missouri law regarding St. Louis City’s police force.If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.

Proposition B

Tobacco
Shall Missouri law be amended to:
  • create the Health and Education Trust Fund with proceeds of a tax of $0.0365 per cigarette and 25% of the manufacturer’s invoice price for roll-your-own tobacco and 15% for other tobacco products;
  • use Fund proceeds to reduce and prevent tobacco use and for elementary, secondary, college, and university public school funding; and
  • increase the amount that certain tobacco product manufacturers must maintain in their escrow accounts, to pay judgments or settlements, before any funds in escrow can be refunded to the tobacco product manufacturer and create bonding requirements for these manufacturers?
Estimated additional revenue to state government is $283 million to $423 million annually with limited estimated implementation costs or savings. The revenue will fund only programs and services allowed by the proposal. The fiscal impact to local governmental entities is unknown. Escrow fund changes may result in an unknown increase in future state revenue.
 
“yes” vote will amend Missouri law to create the Health and Education Trust Fund with proceeds from a tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products.  The amount of the tax is $0.0365 per cigarette and 25% of the manufacturer’s invoice price for roll-your-own tobacco and 15% for other tobacco products.  The Fund proceeds will be used to reduce and prevent tobacco use and for elementary, secondary, college, and university public school funding.  This amendment also increases the amount that certain tobacco product manufacturers must maintain in their escrow accounts, to pay judgments or settlements, before any funds in escrow can be refunded to the tobacco product manufacturer and creates bonding requirements for these manufacturers.
“no” vote will not change the current Missouri law regarding taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products or the escrow account and bonding requirements for certain tobacco product manufacturers.
If passed, this measure will increase taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products.

Proposition E

Health care
Shall Missouri Law be amended to prohibit the Governor or any state agency, from establishing or operating state-based health insurance exchanges unless authorized by a vote of the people or by the legislature?No direct costs or savings for state and local governmental entities are expected from this proposal. Indirect costs or savings related to enforcement actions, missed federal funding, avoided implementation costs, and other issues are unknown.
 
“yes” vote will amend Missouri law to prohibit the Governor or any state agency, from establishing or operating state-based health insurance exchanges unless authorized by a vote of the people or by the legislature.
“no” vote will not amend Missouri law to prohibit the Governor or any state agency, from establishing or operating state-based health insurance exchanges unless authorized by a vote of the people or by the legislature.
If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.

The officially approved ballot language CITED above for all four November ballot issues is here.

Key Statewide Races:

Governor:

Jay Nixon (I) – platform
Dave Spence – platform

Lieutenant Governor:

Peter Kinder (I) – website
Susan Montee – website

Secretary of State:

Jason Kander – website – wikipedia
Shane Schoeller – website – wikipedia

Treasurer:

Cole McNary – website – wikipedia
Clint Zweifel – website – wikipedia

Attorney General:

Chris Koster (I) – website – wikipedia
Ed Martin – website – wikipedia

All other offices/candidates

Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy to Treat Nursing Home Patient Wounds

NURSING HOME NEGLIGENCE LAWYER ON WOUND CARE

Des Peres Hospital opened a new outpatient wound care center Monday that treats patients with chronic or non-healing wounds associated with, among other things, diabetes, pressure ulcers, trauma, peripheral vascular disease, poor circulation, immobility and other conditions.   The center offers two chambers for hyperbaric oxygen therapy to reduce swelling, fight infection and build new blood vessels, ultimately producing healthy tissue.

Pressure ulcers are the most common cause for a lawsuit against nursing homes, if they are due either to a lack of prevention or improper treatment.  The Wound Care Center by Des Peres Hospital is using some of the most advanced wound care technology available and is setting the standard of care higher for treatment of wounds.

In addition to the hyperbaric chambers, the new center has infectious-disease management, physical therapy, occupational therapy, laboratory evaluation, nutritional management, pain management, diabetic education, radiology testing and wound debridement (removal of dead tissue) to address the patient’s total health.  For more information, visit www.stlwoundcare.com.

Pressure ulcers, also known as bed sores, pressure sores, or decubitus ulcers, are wounds caused by unrelieved pressure on the skin. They usually develop over bony prominences, such as the elbow, heel, hip, shoulder, back, and back of the head. Pressure ulcers are serious medical conditions and one of the important measures of the quality of clinical care in nursing homes.

From about 2% to 28% of nursing home residents have pressure ulcers.

The most common system for staging pressure ulcers classifies them based on the depth of soft tissue damage, ranging from the least severe (stage 1) to the most severe (stage 4).

There is persistent redness of skin in stage 1; a loss of partial thickness of skin appearing as an abrasion, blister, or shallow crater in stage 2; a loss of full thickness of skin, presented as a deep crater in stage 3; and a loss of full thickness of skin exposing muscle or bone in stage 4. Clinical practice guidelines for pressure ulcers have been developed and provide specific treatment recommendations for stage 2 or higher pressure ulcers, including proper wound care.

Statistics from the CDC:

  • In 2004, about 159,000 current U.S. nursing home residents (11%) had pressure ulcers. Stage 2 pressure ulcers were the most common.

  • Residents aged 64 years and under were more likely than older residents to have 

  • pressure ulcers.

  • Residents of nursing homes for a year or less were more likely to have pressure ulcers than those with longer stays. 

  • One in five nursing home residents with a recent weight loss had pressure ulcers. 

  • Thirty-five percent of nursing home residents with stage 2 or higher (more severe) pressure ulcers received special wound care services in 2004.

Data from the national nursing home survey, 2004, published in NCHS Data Brief, No. 14, February 2009.

If a hard-to-heal wound is not treated, it may get bigger and deeper over time.  This may significantly increase the patient’s chances of infection, which if severe enough, may require hospitalization. If the tissue damage from infection is extensive, the patient may need surgery or amputation.

If your loved one has received improper care or you are not certain whether a nursing home has acted below the standard of care, contact Michelle Funkenbusch at 314-799-6602 for a free consultation.  As a trial lawyer, Funkenbusch has been involved in many nursing home cases and has witnessed the lack of training of staff, the improper care, the lack of documentation of records, and the abuse that occurs regularly.   A lawyer needs to be properly trained to read nursing home records. Contact Funkenbusch for more details about her extensive experience in this area.

 

© 2012 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.

 

Red Light Cameras… Here to Stay

They are here to stay…

Missouri Red Light Camera Review

The Creve Coeur City Council could hear an ordinance as soon as next week that would move to extend the city’s use of “Red Light” cameras.

As a lawyer, the MOST common question I am asked from friends and family is whether red light camera violations are enforceable.  The answer usually depends on where you got the ticket.

red light camera is a traffic enforcement camera that captures an image of a vehicle which has entered an intersection against a red traffic light.  By automatically photographing vehicles that run red lights, the camera produces evidence that assists authorities in their enforcement of traffic laws. Generally the camera is triggered when a vehicle enters the intersection after the traffic light has turned red. Typically, a law enforcement official will review the photographic evidence and determine whether a violation occurred. A citation is then usually mailed to the owner of the vehicle found to be in violation of the law.

On August 29, 2012, red light cameras survived yet another class-action lawsuit in Missouri.  A Jefferson County judge rejected a suit that aimed to prohibit the use of red light cameras in Arnold, which became the first Missouri city to deploy the cameras in August 2005.

In his ruling August 29, Judge Mark Stoll noted that the arguments of the defendants — the City of Arnold and camera company American Traffic Solution — were the “most persuasive.”

With this Arnold ruling, attorneys with the Simon Law Firm of St. Louis have now lost four decisions that sought to prohibit use of the cameras in Kansas City, Arnold, Florissant and Creve Coeur.

Despite at least a half-dozen legal challenges statewide, only two rulings have gone in favor of those opposed to the cameras.

In February 2012, a St. Louis Circuit Court judge ruled the city ordinance void. (That decision is under appeal.) In his ruling February 17, Judge Mark Neill upheld a partial judgment he made last May that found the city improperly enacted its red-light camera ordinance without enabling legislation from the Missouri legislature.

And in 2010 the Missouri Supreme Court held against the way Springfield enforced its citations.

For more information on the Creve Couer red light camers see: http://crevecoeur.patch.com/articles/red-light-cameras-seem-likely-to-stay

© 2012 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.

Funkenbusch Attends Art Auction Charity Event to Benefit Non-Profit PayBack, Inc.

Trial Attorney Michelle Funkenbusch attended the PayBack Art Auction and Friends of PayBack Party on October 1, 2012.  Funkenbusch is the Immediate Past President and Executive Board Member of the 501(c)(3) charity PayBack, Inc..  The non-profit held its annual Reception and Art Auction at Mark and Cheryl Levison’s historic Compton Heights house.

PayBack, Inc. Art Auction and Friends of PayBack Party

All proceeds from fundraiser event benefit PayBack, Inc. The event was sponsored by BJC HealthCare, Lashly & Baer, P.C., and Datamax.The guests enjoyed an elegant reception with cocktails and hors d’oeuvres, and music by Jeff Riley Jazz Suite Orchestra.

An Art Auction featured St. Louis local artists Jennifer Hayes, Scott Lokitz, Myles Keough, Crystal Rolfe and JA Chapman.

David Shaller, Attorney at Law, was the 2012 Friends of PayBack Honoree, and was a founding Board members of 1983. For more than 30 years, St. Louis Attorney David Shaller has helped families and individual with their legal needs. David Shaller received the 2012 Community Spirit Award Winner, Corporate Sponsorship Award Winner, and Lifetime Service Award Winner.

PayBack, Inc. is non-profit corporation specializing in securing funding for juvenile restitution programs. 70% of the juveniles, who participate in PayBack, never return to the Family Courts as re-offenders. More than half a million dollars has been returned to metro area crime victims by the youth in the PayBack program.

PayBack, Inc. is a juvenile restitution/community service organization that has been serving the greater St. Louis Metropolitan area since 1982. The  offices are currently located in the St. L

ouis Family Court Building. PayBack’s goal is to raise money to fund our “restorative justice” program whereby juvenile offenders work at other local non-profits (like the YMCA or Big Brothers/Big Sisters) around our community to earn money to pay back their victims. Our program is unique in that the victims actually get paid back up to $500.00 when PayBack sends a check to the court for the hours the child worked. In addition, the children learn accountability and job skills while a long list of non-profits get volunteers. The community, the victims, and the children all gain from this wonderful program that restores justice. Funding for Payback is entirely supported by voluntary contributions, grants, and donations from foundations.

Upcoming on Sat. Oct. 20, 2012, is PayBack, Inc.’s 3rd Annual Bocce Tournament at Milo’s on The Hill, St. Louis, MO, 5201 Wilson at Marconi, 63110. The first round starts at noon.  $100 per each 4 person team/ $25 a person. Double Elimination. Registration for each team of 4 includes:   • one appetizer (except antipasto platter) and • one pitcher of domestic beer

For photos from the 2012 Art Auction event: http://laduenews.mycapture.com/mycapture/folder.asp?event=1542554&CategoryID=72747&ListSubAlbums=0&thisPage=2

Supreme Court of Missouri Nominees Announced

We will have a new Supreme Court Justice in the State of Missouri come this December.  The Honorable Richard B. Teitelman, chief justice of the Supreme Court of Missouri and chairman of the Appellate Judicial Commission, announced that the commission selected its panel of nominees to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court of Missouri. This vacancy was created when Judge William Ray Price Jr. retired in August 2012, after serving 20 years on the Court.  Price had served two terms as chief justice.

After more than six hours of public interviews, nearly three hours of deliberations and six rounds of balloting, the nominees are: Hon. Michael W. Manners, five votes; Stanley J. Wallach, four votes; and Paul C. Wilson, four votes.

Manners is a circuit judge in the 16th Judicial Circuit (Jackson County). He was born Sept. 25, 1950. He earned his bachelor of arts degree, summa cum laude, in 1972 in history and political science from Central Missouri State University in Warrensburg, Mo., and his law degree in 1976 from the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law. Manners lives in Lee’s Summit.

Wallach is an attorney with the Wallach Law Firm in St. Louis. He was born Aug. 24, 1965. He earned his bachelor of arts degree, with honors, in 1987 in political science and Russian from Duke University in Durham, N.C., and his law degree in 1992 from the University of Chicago Law School. Wallach lives in Kirkwood, Mo.

Wilson is a member of Van Matre, Harrison, Hollis, Taylor & Bacon PC in Columbia, Mo. He was born May 23, 1961. He earned his bachelor of arts in 1982 from Drury College in Springfield, Mo., and his law degree, cum laude, in 1992 from the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law. Wilson lives in Jefferson City.

The governor has 60 days to select one member of the panel to fill the vacancy. Should he fail to do so, the Missouri Constitution directs the commission to make the appointment.

In addition to Teitelman, the commission is composed of attorneys Thomas M. Burke of St. Louis, J.R. Hobbs of Kansas City and John D. Wooddell of Springfield and lay members Cheryl M. Darrough of Columbia, John T. Gentry of Springfield and Donald L. Ross of St. Louis.

Top Ten Things to Do When You Are Hit By a Car on Your Bicycle

Top Ten Things to Do After a Bicycle Accident from St. Louis Bicycle Accident Attorney 

Cyclists are injured and killed by hit-and-run drivers every day. Today, a cyclist was killed while trying to cross the street after exiting a well known bike path in Fullerton, California. Police are searching for a black vehicle involved in a hit-and-run accident that left the bicyclist dead.  Police said the man that was hit appeared to have come off a popular biking trail and was crossing the street.  The vehicle fled the scene, and then the victim was hit by a second vehicle, which stopped.  The bicyclist was rushed to a local hospital, where he was pronounced dead shortly after.

Here is a checklist to follow if you are hit while riding your bicycle and are still able to function. If you were not able to function at the time of the accident, or your loved one was killed, it is imperative you or your family contact an experienced bicycle accident attorney immediately. Make sure your family knows who you want them to call in an emergency.  If you are a witness to an accident, please help the victim with the following top ten things to do after a cycling accident:

CHECKLIST FOR BIKE ACCIDENTS

1.  Get out of the road to avoid being hit a second time; however, if possible, take pictures (or have someone else take pictures) before the bike or car are moved.

2.  Get the phone numbers and names of all witnesses.

3.  Make sure to remember what if anything the driver, passengers, and or witnesses admit or tell you about the accident.

4.  Call the police immediately and make a police report.  Do not let the driver talk you out of making a report.

5.  Do not ignore your pain and blow it off. People are often hurt way worse than what they thought at the time of the accident due to adrenaline.  Go to an ER or doctor immediately if you have any pain. If you do not document that you are injured in medical records, you have no case for personal injuries.

6.  Ask to see the driver’s license and insurance information. Do not just let them write it down for you. Get the phone numbers to make a claim. Check the policy dates on the card to verify you have the correct insurance card. 

7.  Seek an estimate of your bike damage for repair and replacement value from a reputable shop like Maplewood Bicycle. http://www.maplewoodbicycle.com/.  Do NOT try to fix it on your own without first getting the estimate.

8. Do not destroy anything that could be evidence such as a cracked helmut, torn clothing, bloody shoes, etc.

9.  Do NOT give a recorded statement to the insurance company. They are NOT on your side and will try to trick you into saying something to use against you in court.  

10.  Call a bicycle accident attorney within 24 hours in order to preserve all evidence, to contact witnesses, to make sure the police have the correct story (in case a supplemental report is needed with your statement), and to let the insurance company for the driver know you are represented and cannot be bullied into a settlement that greatly undervalues your case.

Again, if you or your loved one are hit while cycling, contact Missouri Cycling Advocate and Bicycle Accident Attorney, Michelle M. Funkenbusch at 314-338-3500.   If you would like a FREE hour presentation to your community group, athletic club, or children’s organization, on Missouri bicycle law and safety measures, please contact Michelle.

Missouri cyclist killed in accident during charity ride

A 48-year-old bicyclist from Independence died Saturday after he was struck by a vehicle while riding along a rural route of a charity ride east of Buckner.

Michael D. Forbes was riding west shortly after 8 a.m. on U.S. 24 near County Road H when a westbound car struck his rear wheel, according to the Missouri Highway Patrol.

Forbes was riding the route of the Freedom From Cancer Ride, a charity event that started at 7 a.m. in Independence and extended to Lexington and back. Forbes wanted to start earlier than the official race time, so he was actually headed back to Independence as hundreds of other riders were still riding east, said Chris Pace, the event’s coordinator.

Forbes was alone, so other riders didn’t see the accident, Pace said.

Troopers still investigating the bicycle/car accident cited inattention by the 32-year-old driver as a cause. The driver told troopers he had glanced down at his dashboard. When he looked back up, it was too late to avoid hitting the cyclist, said Sgt. Collin Stosberg.

Troopers are going to subpoena cellphone records from the driver as a routine part of the investigation, Stosberg said.

Evidence showed Forbes was on the roadway, according to the Highway Patrol.

The victim and his wife, who was volunteering at the event, are well known and liked in the cycling community, Pace said.

“It’s tragic all the way around,” Pace said. “He was a good guy. He’d do anything for anybody.”

Cyclists know their hobby can be dangerous, Pace said, especially with multiplying distractions inside vehicles.

“All I can say is try to ride in a group,” Pace said. “Try to make yourself a bigger target.”

SOURCE: BY CHRISTINE VENDEL, To reach Christine Vendel, call 816-234-4438 or send email to cvendel@kcstar.com.  Posted on Sat, Jun. 30, 2012 09:47 PM

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/06/30/3684614/independence-cyclist-killed-in.html#storylink=cpy
If you are in need of a personal injury lawyer specializing in cycling accidents,  Contact Michelle M. Funkenbusch, Missouri’s Advocate for the Cyclists.

Transportation-related bills from the 2012 legislative session passed and awaiting the governor’s signature

[UPDATE 8 JULY 2012: Bills signed or approved by Governor Nixon are indicated.]

A number of transportation related bills passed the Missouri General Assembly this year and are now awaiting the governor’s signature.

The Missouri Bicycle and Pedestrian Federation recently gave a summary of the bicycle and pedestrian related bills and issues that came up during this year’s legislative session.  Now an even larger list–all of the significant transportation-related bills, whether or not they include bicycle or pedestrian provisions.Missouri Capitol and bicyclists

Almost all of the bills are ‘omnibus’ bills containing somewhere between a few and many different provisions.  To see the full list of provisions, click through to the bill’s page. The list below points out only those provisions of special interest for bicycling, walking, or trails:

  • SB 470 – Optional 3rd license plate for use when bike rack or other obstruction obscures the rear license plate (Ryan’s law)
  • SB 568 – Cities are allowed to levy a transportation tax under 74.700 to 74.755 RSMO.  The tax can be used for mass transit, roads, streets, bridges, airports, and planning. SB 568 adds “sidewalks, trails, and community-owned parking” to the list of allowed items for the tax.
  • SB 607 – Allows billboards to be moved or removed under special rules when a stretch of highway undergoes construction.
  • SB 611 – temporary permit tags; yellow light duration; move over law
  • SB 665 – conveys certain real estate to MoDOT
  • SB 719 – motorcycle training course exemption; use of state park roads by commercial entities (ie, bike rental, canoe rental)
  • HB 1402 – Optional 3rd license plate for use when bike rack or other obstruction obscures the rear license plate (Ryan’s law); “moderate” billboard legislation requiring MoDOT to create regulations government digital signs; includes many other provisions
  • HB 1504 – authorizing additional funding for Great Rivers Greenway District for trails, greenways, parks, and improvement of the Arch district in St. Louis City, St. Louis County, and St. Charles County; authorizing creation of a Trails and Greenway District in Jackson County and creation of a sales tax to fund trails and greenways.  This is state enabling legislation–all taxes must be approved by voters in the respective counties before they become effective.
  • HB 1807 [signed by governor 6 July 2012] – Designates the bike/ped path on the Heart of America Bridge in Kansas City as the “Bob Watts Memorial Bicycle & Pedestrian Bridge”.  Bob was a pioneering bicycle and pedestrian advocate in Missouri and former MoBikeFed Chair.
  • HB 2004 and HB 2005 [signed by governor 22 June 2012 with one minor line-item veto in HB 2004] – Appropriating funding for MoDOT.
  • SCR 26 – Establishes the Joint Interim Committee on Transportation Needs to study the transportation infrastructure needs of Missouri

You’ll note that some provisions, such as Ryan’s Law, are included as part of two or more bills.  This is a common legislative tactic–each bill the language is included in raises the odds of that language passing at least once–and helps the provision survive a veto if one or more of the large omnibus transportation bills is vetoed.  So if a certain provision passes twice or more, it can only help and doesn’t hurt anything.

As an advocate for the protection of cyclists and pedestrians, I strongly urge you to support bicycling, walking, and trails in Missouri and work towards Complete Streets policies in Missouri that will help every community become safer and more inviting for walking and bicycling.  Bicycling, walking, and trails are important for our health, for the livability of our communities, and for the economic vitality of our state as it competes on a national and international level.  The governor has until July 14th to sign most of these bills.  

SOURCE: Missouri Bicycle and Pedestrian Federation, Article Submitted by Brent Hugh on Thu, 06/07/2012 – 2:27pm

Summary of U.S. Report on Commuting by Bike and on Foot by Missouri Bicycle Accident Lawyer

The Status of Bicycling and Walking in the U.S.

Government officials working to promote bicycling and walking need data to evaluate their efforts. In order to improve something, there must be a means to measure it. The Alliance for Biking & Walking’s Benchmarking Project is an ongoing effort to collect and analyze data on bicycling and walking in all 50 states and the 51 largest cities. They have now prepared the third biennial Benchmarking Report which is 248 pages long. The first report was published in 2007, the second in 2010, and the next report is scheduled for January 2014.

WHERE ARE THE MOST NON-VEHICLE COMMUTERS?

According to the report, the top ten cities where the most people commute by bike or on foot are: 1. Alaska 2. Vermont 3. New York 4. Montana 5. Oregon 6. Hawaii 7. Massachusetts 8. South Dakota 9. Wyoming 10. Maine.  The number one position, Alaska,  indicates it is the state with the highest share of commuters who commute by bicycle or foot.  The cities who ranked highest in commuting by bike and on foot are: 1. Boston  2. Washington, DC 3. San Francisco 4. Seattle 5. New York 6. Portland, OR  7. Minneapolis 8. Philadelphia 9. Honolulu 10. New Orleans.

Missouri ranked 40th out of the 50 states in the levels of commuting by bike or on foot. 

This information comes from the 2007-2009 ACS Notes: This ranking is based on the combined bike and walk to work share from the 2007-2009 ACS. View graphs illustrating this data on pages 34 and 35 of the Benchmark Report.

WHICH IS THE SAFEST STATE FOR A COMMUTER BY BIKE OR ON FOOT?

This is difficult to determine, but one statistic to consider is the number of fatalities per population commuting by walking or biking to work.  The arguably safest state based on fatality statistics is Vermont. The top safest states rank as follows: 1. Vermont 2. Nebraska 3. Alaska 4. Wyoming 5. South Dakota 6. North Dakota 7. Iowa 8. Maine 9. Massachusetts 10. Minnesota. See FARS 2007-2009 ACS 2007-2009.  Note that this ranking is based on the fatality rate which is calculated by dividing the number of annual pedestrian and bicycle fatalities (averaged between 2007-2009) by population (weighted, or multiplied, by share of the population walking and bicycling to work). View these data on pages 56-62 of this report.

Illinois ranked in the top half  of lowest fatalities/population commuting by bike/foot at 23rd,

but Missouri was in the 34th position.

The top twelve cities who ranked the safest based on the fatality statistics  are as follows: 1. Boston 2. Minneapolis 3. Omaha 4. Seattle 5. Portland, OR 6. Washington, DC 7. New York 8, San Francisco 9. Philadelphia 10. Honolulu 11. Colorado Springs 12. Chicago. Kansas City, MO ranked 45th and St. Louis did not make the list because this report focuses on the 50 states and the 51 largest U.S. cities. Most bicycling and walking is in urban areas, and because of short trip distances, the most potential for increasing bicycling and walking is in cities.

Summary of Additional Facts From the Report

Bicycling and Walking Levels:

  • 12% of all trips are by bicycle (1.0%) or foot (10.5%).
  • From 2000 to 2009, the number of commuters who bicycle to work increased by 57%.
  • In 2009, 40% of trips in the United States were shorter than 2 miles, yet Americans use their cars for 87% of trips 1 to 2 miles. Twenty-seven percent of trips are shorter than 1 mile, yet 62% of trips up to 1 mile long are by car. Residents of the largest U.S. cities are 1.7 times more likely to walk or bicycle to work than the national average.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety:

  • 14% of all traffic fatalities in the U.S. are bicyclists (1.8%) or pedestrians (11.7%).
  • In the 51 largest U.S. cities, 12.7% of trips are by foot and 1.1% are by bicycle, yet 26.9% of traffic fatalities are pedestrians and 3.1% are bicyclists
  • Seniors are the most vulnerable bicyclists and pedestrians. Adults over 65 make up 10% of walking trips, yet comprise 19% of pedestrian fatalities and make up 6% of bicycling trips, yet account for and 10% of bicyclist fatalities.

Funding for Bicycling and Walking:

 • States spend just 1.6% of their federal transportation dollars on bicycling and walking. This amounts to just $2.17 per capita.

Missouri was ranked 17th out of the 50 states in funding bicycling and walking.

This ranking is based on the per capita spending of federal funds by states and cities on bicycling and walking using a 5-year average (2006-2010). Data is based on funds obligated to projects in this period and are not necessarily the amount spent in these years. The number one position, again Alaska, indicates the state with the highest amount of per capita federal funding to bicycling and walking.  View these data on pages 86-87 of this report.

Here are some additional facts about financial benefits from the extensive report:

Public Health Benefits:

• Bicycling and walking levels fell 66% between 1960 and 2009, while obesity levels increased by 156%.

• Between 1966 and 2009, the number of children who bicycled or walked to school fell 75%, while the percentage of obese children rose 276%.

• In general, states with the highest levels of bicycling and walking have the lowest levels of obesity, hypertension (high blood pressure), and diabetes and have the greatest percentage of adults who meet the recommended 30-plus minutes per day of physical activity.

Economic Benefits:

 • Bicycling and walking projects create 11-14 jobs per $1 million spent, compared to just 7 jobs created per $1 million spent on highway projects.

 • Cost benefit analyses show that up to $11.80 in benefits can be gained for every $1 invested in bicycling and walking.

Download the complete report at: www.PeoplePoweredMovement.org/Benchmarking

Michelle M. Funkenbusch is a cycling advocate and Missouri trial attorney specializing in representing cyclists who have been injured in accidents. Please contact her if you wish for her to speak with your group about the benefits of cycling or if you have been injured in an accident. 314-799-6602. mmf@SaintLouisLegal.com

City Trial Lawyer “Goes Country” and Explains Why Farm Accident Cases Are Sometimes Filed in Civil Court and Sometimes In the Division of Worker’s Compensation:

Farm Accidents: Worker’s Compensation or Civil Lawsuit?

I may be a St. Louis City trial lawyer, but I have two pairs of Justin Roper boots, a pair of Rockies jeans, a four star beaver-fur cowboy hat and yes…. farm accident cases.  I fully admit that twenty years ago, I didn’t know what a combine was, but having farmers in my extended family forced me into the world of cow patties and four wheelers.   I have since been exposed to cases involving falls in grain bins, machinery mishaps, legs being torn off by augers, bodies being sliced by cables that break and fly through the air, etc.  Farm work is dangerous and no place for my city lawyer stiletto heels.  But, farms are a place for a big city trial lawyer’s experience and I’ll share a little of that experience with you today concerning where a suit/claim is filed when a farm accident occurs.

There are more than 2 million farms in the United States.  Farms vary greatly in their size from small, family-run farms to large production facilities with million dollar sales.  No matter the kind of accident on a farm, the first question is whether we file a civil suit in a court of law or file a workers compensation claim. And the answer is…. it depends.  Even though you may have been injured on the job, not all farm accidents are covered by Missouri Worker’s Compensation laws.  In ’78, Missouri amended its worker’s compensation laws related to farming.  These laws created an exemption for employers of farm labor from carrying workers’ compensation insurance, meaning your injury case would be filed in a civil court (the kind of court where car accident cases are normally filed).  However, farm employers of non-farm labor are required to carry worker’s compensation insurance if they have five or more employees. If laborers work more than 5-1/2 consecutive work days per year, then each counts as an employee.

Needless to say, it is not easy to determine where to file a claim/lawsuit and it most likely requires the expertise of a Missouri farm accident trial lawyer.  For example, the average employee may not know that last year the Court of Appeal in Missouri in State ex. rel. KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Co. v. Cook, — S.W.3d —-, 2011 WL 4031146 (Mo.App. W.D. 2011)held that occupational disease claims (like carpal tunnel syndrome, cubital tunnel syndrome, & mesothelioma), are not subject to workers’ compensation’s exclusive remedy. Under the Cook decision, an employee with a work-related occupational disease may now choose between bringing a workers’ compensation claim with the Division of Worker’s Compensation or file a lawsuit for damages.

Pros & Cons of Farm Accidents Being Covered By Missouri Workers’ Compensation:

The Pros of Your Farm Accident Case Being Handled Under the Worker’s Compensation System:

In addition to being a simpler and more flexible system as far as evidence goes, worker’s compensation gives employees way more assurance they will get some compensation for their injuries than if the case was filed in a civil court.  In fact, unlike a civil case, you can potentially get temporary weekly disability benefits, medical paid for by the employer, and reimbursement for expenses… all before a formal administrative hearing (trial) on the case.

A huge benefit in worker’s compensation is that you do not have to prove your employer was negligent, like you do in civil court.  In fact, you can even be entirely at fault and recover under worker’s compensation!  While you can be penalized for violating a safety statute or using drugs or alcohol on the job, you are generally way better off  in workers compensation if the accident was your own fault.  You also avoid unpredictable juries and strict judges who throw out evidence that does not conform to the strict rules of civil suits.

As a worker’s compensation lawyer, I can generally tell you a range of what various injuries are worth in the workers’ compensation arena, assuming we know your average weekly wage and your permanent disabilities related to your injury.  This predictability is the benefit of the Missouri Worker’s Compensation system. But, keep in mind, employers are benefiting from worker’s compensation coverage too.  They are limiting their liability for farm accidents to the coverage under the workers compensation insurance policies. Once again, farm accident law is tricky and you should consult with a Missouri farm accident trial lawyer, like myself to analyze your claim.

The Cons of Your Farm Accident Case Being Under the Worker’s Compensation System:

The biggest disadvantage to the farm employee (who often sustains major injuries) is that you have no chance of the million dollar verdicts you see in farm accident cases filed in civil court.  The value of your case if it is a major injury is often less in worker’s compensation hearings.  You get no compensation for pain and suffering.  No compensation for the suffering of your spouse when he/she had to be your caregiver.  No jury of your peers to feel sorry for you.  Worker’s compensation is often an almost emotionless system of numbers and charts.  The Administrative Law Judges at the Division of Worker’s Compensation have generally seen every type of injury many times and usually place an injury in a specific disability range (which predicts the dollar value) to be consistent in their rulings and opinions. No run-away verdict is possible.

There is also a shorter statute of limitations in workers’ compensation (2 or 3 years depending on the facts) than in civil personal injury suits (5 years).Worker’s

In the workers’ compensation system, workplace exposure to a hazard must be the “prevailing factor” of the injury in farm accident cases and farm occupational disease cases… not just the proximate cause like in civil court.  You can thank Missouri tort reform in 2005 for that higher standard.  And no, I won’t be sending a Christmas card to Blunt anytime soon. With a pro-employer legislature in Missouri right now, it would not be surprising to see additional amendments that make worker’s compensation cases more difficult to prove.

Farming  is consistently one of the most hazardous industries.

Each day, about 500 farm employees experience injuries.

In an average year, 110 American farm workers are crushed to death by tractor rollovers. 

I represent those men and women injured in all forms of farm accidents.

If you, or someone you love, has suffered serious injuries, or you have lost a loved one to wrongful death, I can help.  Call me today to learn about your rights and options in your potential farm accident case. 

Michelle M. Funkenbusch 314-799-6602.

Personal Portable Breathalyzer Tests To Help Avoid Tickets For DUI

As we continue through this holiday season in St. Louis, consider buying your favorite partier a portable breathalyzer for $30.00 to $100.00. While they may not be as accurate as police testing for DUI, they are valuable in helping someone realize they need to call a cab. I regularly represent people with DUI’s who believe they were not drunk… until we read the police report and see their BAC levels.

How do breathalyzers show your alcohol level during DUI testing? Alcohol (ethanol) shows up in your breath because it gets absorbed from the mouth, throat, stomach and intestines into your bloodstream.  Ethanol­ is not digested upon absorption, nor chemically changed in the bloodstream. As the blood travels through your lungs, some of the ethanol moves across the membranes of the lung’s air sacs (which are called alveoli) into the air.  The concentration of the alcohol in the alveolar air is related to the concentration of the alcohol in the blood. For you science and math people… the ratio of breath alcohol to blood alcohol is 2,100:1. This means that 2,100 milliliters (ml) of alveolar air will contain the same amount of alcohol as 1 ml of blood.

As the alcohol in your alveolar air is exhaled, police can detect it by a breath alcohol testing device. The American Medical Association touts that a person can become impaired when the blood alcohol level hits as little as 0.05. 0.08 is the legal limit in Missouri.  If a person’s BAC measures 0.08, it means that there are 0.08 grams of alcohol per 100 ml of blood.

While we are often able to resolve a first DUI in the St. Louis area with a Suspended Imposition of Sentence (which results in no conviction if you complete a long probationary period and other requirements), you will still have to face a potential administrative suspension through the Department of Revenue.

If you have questions about DUI tickets in the Greater St. Louis area, please do not hesitate to contact me at 314-799-6602.  Be safe everyone!

 

© 2011 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.

Three Vehicle Crash in Taney County

Multiple Car Collisions Require Experienced Trial Lawyers

St. Louis car accident attorney Michelle M. Funkenbusch specializes in head on collisions like the following complex car crash that could require reconstruction, complex medical record reviews, and a trial against multiple defendants.

According to the news, a Forsyth woman was hospitalized following a three-car crash in Taney County Saturday evening. According to the Missouri Highway Patrol, Jodi M. Ebersol, 37, was driving a 1997 Ford Taurus east on Taney County F, five miles north of Branson, when her car was struck head on by a 1982 Honda Goldwing that had crossed the center line. According to the patrol report, the crash caused her car to swerve into the oncoming lane, hitting a 2004 Crown Victoria head on. Ms. Ebersol was treated for serious injuries.

The report said the motorcycle, driven by Benjamin K. Sanders, 31, of Branson, was being pursued at the time by the Crown Victoria, which was driven by Bernard H. Johnson, 69, of Rockaway Beach. It is unclear why he was being pursued.

Source: News-Leader.com, “Forsyth woman injured in crash,” 5 June 2011

At Featherston & Funkenbusch, we work hard to help you recover maximum compensation for lost wages, property damage, pain and suffering, disability and reduced quality of life. Because of our experince in complex motor vehicle accident cases, we have handled many claims similar to the above accident. If you get in an accident like this, call today before giving any statements to insurance companies. Michelle is available 24/7, 314-842-5222 to provide you a free initial consultation on your accident case.

Racial Profiling and the June 2011 Missouri Vehicle Stops Report

Today Attorney General Chris Koster released the 11th Annual Report on Vehicle Stops by Peace Officers in Missouri.  The 2010 report contains analysis on more than 1.6 million stops by 630 law enforcement agencies, including racial and ethnic information about drivers who were stopped. The full report plus data for individual law enforcement agencies can be found online at http://ago.mo.gov/VehicleStops.

Concerns by the citizens of Missouri regarding allegations of racial profiling by law enforcement prompted the legislature in the year 2000 to pass  Section 590.650, RSMo.  Racial profiling has been defined as the inappropriate use of race by law enforcement when making a decision to stop, search or arrest a motorist.  The law requires that all peace officers in the state report specific information including a driver’s race for each vehicle stop made in the state.  Law enforcement agencies are required to turn in the data to the Attorney General, and the Attorney General is required to compile the data and report to the Governor no later than June 1 of each year.   Interestingly, the law allows the Governor to withhold state funds for any agency that does not comply with the law.

In 2010, the Missouri statewide African-American disparity index was 1.61, down slightly from the 2009 rate of 1.62. This is the second time since data collection began that the disparity index for African-American drivers has decreased – the other being a decrease from 1.36 in 2003 to 1.34 in 2004.

The report shows the rate (disparity index) at which Hispanics were stopped decreased in 2010 to .78, compared to .81 in 2009, a rate lower than that of white drivers. However, search rates (the rates at which drivers of a given race are searched subsequent to a traffic stop) for both Hispanic and African-American drivers continue to be higher than for whites. Hispanic drivers were 2.13 times more likely than white drivers to be searched. African-Americans were 1.86 times more likely to be searched when stopped than whites.

Despite the elevated search rates, Hispanics were less likely than white drivers to be found with contraband subsequent to being searched. While the “contraband hit rate” for whites was 24.5 percent, the percentage of Hispanics searched and found to have contraband was 14.4 percent. The “contraband hit rate” for African-American drivers was 17.5 percent.

Funkenbusch encourages you to view your individual community on the Attorney General’s site.

© 2011 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.